|
Post by mrbaldrick on Dec 7, 2022 17:45:42 GMT
They aren't though - they are mentioned, in a fluffy, in universe POV description of how an attack happens. Further, your tone is out of order - you may not agree with FvonSigmaringen however their knowledge of the rules and their application is pretty impeccable, added to which their propensity to provide sources and page references for any advice or answer they give. You'd be well placed to mind your manners. There is nothing wrong with my tone. This is a clear case of over analyzing the situation. Don't you think if someone is going this far to manipulate the text then they have lost sight of "The Most Important Rule"? Let's keep in mind that this is a game, it's not written by scholars. Not only is it a game but it's a dead game. Instead of going overboard to argue something so ridiculous just be happy there are other people even still playing the damn game.
|
|
|
Post by sonofkurnos on Dec 7, 2022 17:56:51 GMT
They aren't though - they are mentioned, in a fluffy, in universe POV description of how an attack happens. Further, your tone is out of order - you may not agree with FvonSigmaringen however their knowledge of the rules and their application is pretty impeccable, added to which their propensity to provide sources and page references for any advice or answer they give. You'd be well placed to mind your manners. There is nothing wrong with my tone. This is a clear case of over analyzing the situation. Don't you think if someone is going this far to manipulate the text then they have lost sight of "The Most Important Rule"? Let's keep in mind that this is a game, it's not written by scholars. Not only is it a game but it's a dead game. Instead of going overboard to argue something so ridiculous just be happy there are other people even still playing the damn game. Telling someone they need to 'dial it back' and pointing out they aren't the 'be all and end all' is poor tone for what is a friendly forum
|
|
|
Post by mrbaldrick on Dec 7, 2022 18:13:51 GMT
Telling someone they need to 'dial it back' and pointing out they aren't the 'be all and end all' is poor tone for what is a friendly forum Speaking in absolutes and being dismissive of anyone who has a differing opinion is also a poor tone for a friendly forum.
|
|
|
Post by baaderthegreat on Dec 7, 2022 19:09:13 GMT
Hi guys,
as the one who started this thread I feel a little bit of responsibility...
Written communication is more likely to escalate than oral communication because facial expressions and other things that would be helpful to tone down a heated debate are missing. So...
- Sometimes a comment that wasn't meant to be offensive is missunderstood and therefore perceived as offensive (receiver's fault).
- Sometimes a comment that wasn't meant to be offensive is poorly worded (sender's fault).
So, "in dubio pro reo" is always a good guideline...
|
|
|
Post by sonofkurnos on Dec 7, 2022 19:13:12 GMT
Telling someone they need to 'dial it back' and pointing out they aren't the 'be all and end all' is poor tone for what is a friendly forum Speaking in absolutes and being dismissive of anyone who has a differing opinion is also a poor tone for a friendly forum. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and 'he did it first' is a bad defence for poor behaviour vš
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Dec 7, 2022 23:20:04 GMT
I was not going to post here anymore, but given the additional ad hominem arguments against me, I'll add this one and then hold my tongue. 1. baaderthegreat: You have nothing to be apologetic about. You asked an honest question, and if the discussion afterwards somehow derailed, it has nothing to do with you. 2. As already pointed out earlier, this is a sub-forum/thread about the rules as they are. And that is how it should be: such questions should be preferably settled outside the game, not during the game. By its very nature, that requires reference to and analysis of the written rules. If you do not feel comfortable with that, fine with me, but then do not participate in a sub-forum that is precisely created to do that. 3. Disagreeing with someone, and trying to refute their arguments is not being dismissive. On the contrary, it means you take them and their arguments seriously. I cannot but point out that this is not the case with my detractors. They have not really tried to engage the actual arguments I have made based on the written rules, but rather me as a person. That is being dismissive in my book. 4. You may well accuse me of over-analysing, but, contrary to others, and supported by the history of this forum, if you point out to me a mistake I made, or provide me with a convincing counter-argument based on the rules, I do not feel slighted, but will change my position. And as other threads here can bear witness, I myself am usually the first one to challenge my own position - as long as it is based on the written rules.
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Dec 8, 2022 3:14:56 GMT
Hi guys, as the one who started this thread I feel a little bit of responsibility... Written communication is more likely to escalate than oral communication because facial expressions and other things that would be helpful to tone down a heated debate are missing. So... - Sometimes a comment that wasn't meant to be offensive is missunderstood and therefore perceived as offensive (receiver's fault). - Sometimes a comment that wasn't meant to be offensive is poorly worded (sender's fault). So, "in dubio pro reo" is always a good guideline... It's the subject matter at hand... ....where would Orcs and Goblins be without a little animosity š Gork n Mork'll get ya!
|
|
simon
Full Member
Posts: 150
|
Post by simon on Dec 8, 2022 9:43:55 GMT
I completely agree with baaderthegreat . It is very easy to misunderstand the tone with written messages, especially when people are likely from different countries and different ages etc. In my opinion I don't think anyone has deliberately tried to offend or had 'poor tone'. It seems to be pretty healthy argument so far - I'm quite enjoying it! Sorry to FvonSigmaringen for the adhominem arguments. I only used the word lawyer because you have the word attorney in your profile. However I do feel it is relevant in this instance because sometimes a very forensic/juristic way of reading the text can hinder your ability to understand it. As far as I know (as someone who has played on and off since 4th edition) there has never been a clear distinction between what is 'fluff' and what is 'rule'. Sometimes you get part of the text that is in Italics like with a magic item description and sometimes there is a text with a border around it that tells a story for example - which is clearly just fluff, but other than that the writers often use descriptive 'fluffy' language within the rules, which you can't just airbrush out as not part of the rules. I think it's meaningless to talk about the rules "as written" or the rules "as they are". There is only one set of rules. You have to apply them to different situations, many of which the writers didn't consider when writing the rules simply because there are too many possible situations to think of. In my opinion it has to be taken in as a whole to understand it. If you zoom in too close then you lose sight of what it is - a game. It doesn't work without a pinch of common sense. That said I have noticed how people get a bit shy talking about their real identity here For example I seem to be the only person using his real name. Sorry to break the convention!
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Dec 8, 2022 10:27:02 GMT
Clearly, from the 'SIZE MATTERS ' rule (Orcs & Goblins army book pp.33) the Mangler Squigs are NOT a Goblin unit. The crux of the matter, in relation to this rule is stated... "However, if a Goblin unit that includes even one Orc model should flee, other Orc units will have to test." Ergo, no Orc model in the unit, therefore no other Orc unit is required to test. Also, Mangler squigs are EXPECTED to die, if any Orc finds himslef shaken to the core rather than bellow in laughter at the carnage, do they even WAAAGH! ?? Your first paragraph contradicts with you second. You agree the mangler isn't a goblin unit, the quoted passage in your second paragraph starts with 'if a goblin unit..." I only quoted the relevant part of the rule, if you care to read the full text you'll understand the context better.
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Dec 13, 2022 18:08:37 GMT
I was not going to post here anymore, but given the additional ad hominem arguments against me, I'll add this one and then hold my tongue. this made me laugh
|
|
|
Post by gangland on Dec 13, 2022 21:07:44 GMT
I have to go with FvonSigmaringen's take on this as even the entries referencing the crew are saying that said crew are barely relevant to anything the Mangler Squig is doing. That being said I would be more than happy to do a roll off over it or just concede to the opposing side if they were that invested in it.
|
|
|
Post by wundapantz on Dec 14, 2022 6:31:38 GMT
For what it's worth (very little) I would play it as a goblin unit as I believe that's the intention.
(I think both snotling units and manglers need a 'Nobody Cares' rule to be as disposable to the army in a way matches fluff)
But 100% concede the RAW has no goblin in the entry.
If I was to play a game and someone used that logic to say that they weren't a goblin unit, I'd switch my style of play to be more exact with every rule application, and less fast and loose. More strict but no less friendly š
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Dec 14, 2022 13:35:14 GMT
If I was to play a game and someone used that logic to say that they weren't a goblin unit, I'd switch my style of play to be more exact with every rule application, and less fast and loose. More strict but no less friendly š This really is the heart of ALL these RAW v RAI conundrums. We could all be quite intractible about the rules but then, I believe, that would certainly remove a element of fun from the game. As for name calling etc, both sides are guilty in this thread. Which is a shame to see. Perhaps we should all stop?
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Dec 14, 2022 13:57:13 GMT
As it happens, the original question can also be asked about another unit: the Night Goblin Squig Herd. Since it seems silly to start a new thread (and it is not about the Mangler anyway), I'll post it here. Although the NGSH does have actual Night Goblins in the unit, it is not a Goblin unit for the purposes of the Size matters special rule. As already quoted above O&G p. 33 (Size matters): "For the purposes of this rule, a 'Goblin unit' is any unit that is either made up entirely of Goblins - of any kind - or that is entirely ridden by Goblins, or that has an entirely Goblin crew." Since none of this applies to the NGSH, it is not a Goblin unit.
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Dec 14, 2022 14:39:25 GMT
As it happens, the original question can also be asked about another unit: the Night Goblin Squig Herd. Since it seems silly to start a new thread (and it is not about the Mangler anyway), I'll post it here. Although the NGSH does have actual Night Goblins in the unit, it is not a Goblin unit for the purposes of the Size matters special rule. As already quoted above O&G p. 33 (Size matters): "For the purposes of this rule, a 'Goblin unit' is any unit that is either made up entirely of Goblins - of any kind - or that is entirely ridden by Goblins, or that has an entirely Goblin crew." Since none of this applies to the NGSH, it is not a Goblin unit. Devil's Advocate would say (fluff wise) Mangler Squigs are closer to Night Goblin Squig Hoppers. Surely Night Goblin Squig Hoppers are a 'Goblin Unit'.
|
|